New UN attempt on US soverignty

Senate Considers Adopting U.N Measure Regarding Disabled People
by Karla Dial
As a first step toward ratifying a controversial United Nations resolution, the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing today on how to care for disabled people.

According to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the “best interests of the child” is the gold standard for deciding how those with disabilities are educated — and by whom, and in what setting.

If two-thirds of the senators choose to ratify it, the treaty would become binding, and supersede all existing federal and state laws concerning parental rights, said Michael Farris, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, who testified at the hearing.

“The changes to American law that will be required to comply with the provisions of this treaty are profound and utterly unacceptable,” he said. “Specifically, the changes regarding the rights of parents who have children with disabilities — which includes thousands of homeschooling families — are absolutely inconsistent with the basic constitutional principles of parental rights.

“The ratification of this treaty would constitute the most dangerous departure from the principles of American sovereignty and personal liberty in the history of the United States Senate.”

President Obama signed the CRPD in 2009, and sent it to the Senate in mid-May for ratification.

However, the treaty doesn’t just affect homeschooling families. All taxpayers, through the “framework of international cooperation,” would be obligated to help finance compliance measures in other countries that can’t afford them. And most importantly, Farris warned, it would subjugate the country to United Nations.

“If the United States becomes party to a treaty, all of the legal consequences which flow from this act of ratification will be limited to the territory of the United States,” HSLDA administrators explained in a position paper. “Article 4(2) requires the United States to use its maximum resources for compliance with these standards. The U.N. has interpreted similar provisions to criticize nations who spend too much on military issues and not enough on social programs. There is every reason to believe the U.N. would interpret these provisions in a similar fashion. The U.N. believes it has the power to determine the legitimacy and lawfulness of the budget of the United States to assess compliance with such treaties.”

Farris was one of only two people to speak against the treaty, out of the seven who testified. The others included officials from the U.S. Department of State and the Department of Justice.

Interesting. Considering how close we got with a bill here in AZ that would make complying with the UN a CRIME, and that without any UN treaty action, I would have to hazard a guess that that bill would be quickly resurrected and put in to play. I can't see how an international treaty could supersede the Constitution, but with the current Administration, following the law is a distant second to the gathering of raw naked power.

Actually, Jack, I didn't hear it here first, I heard it from JPFO years ago. Good outfit. That has been tried too - remember the hooplah the leftists tried when Congressman Giffords was shot? That was a "known looney" shooting at a nationally recognized political figure...and our gun laws got better yet again. Didn't hurt that real Arizonans also took down the shooter on the spot, too...even if they were Democrats.
Maybe California, Hawaii or New Jersey doesn't get it, but the vast majority of the states do, and we are doing something the feds REALLY hate - taking the power of the states back. Check what happened with Real ID Act and other we quietly "nullified". What happened to the 55 MPH speedlimits?
I can't help but wish Australia gets ALL her freedoms back, but something tells me what worked there won't quite work as well here, and we have a number of high powered well funded organizations assisting, not to mention open support of many Senators, Congressmen, and the real centers of power, Governors. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the blue helmets will be on parade as Dear Leader invites Rwandan Peacekeepers in to "monitor the border", but I kinda think that's not quite what's going to happen. I also stay politically active to help ensure it never happens.
Jack, why is it I feel the need to have a Vegemite sandwich and a cuppa tea every time I post here? Actually DID have a Vegemite sandwich earlier with tea, seriously. Someday I've got to visit Down Under.

Well,I always was an outlaw and looks like I may die an outlaw.Bring on the blue helmets.I know alot of crazy cajuns would love pumping rounds into em.Aint like it is the first time them backwoods boys lit up some foreign invaders.After looking at LEO and military opinions I feel they would join the right side.